Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

On January 17, 2018, the Defendant driven a ES6 car at one meter EM6 vehicle in front of the D, located in Gyeongsan City, under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.120% (the aforementioned dmark formula) among the blood transfusion around 01:40.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A response to a request for appraisal, and a written appraisal of alcohol during blood transfusion;

1. Reports on detection of any violation of traffic laws on roads and a statement in the circumstances of the driver who takes the driving;

1. Application of investigation report (the determination of a suspect's alcohol concentration property at the time of driving alcohol) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (2) 2 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines concerning facts constituting an offense, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the driver's act of this case constitutes an act of necessity.

However, Article 22(1) of the Criminal Act refers to an act of substantial reason to avoid the present danger to his or another person’s legal interests. In order to constitute “an act of considerable reason,” the act of escape is the only means to protect the legal interests faced with a peril, and should be an appropriate means in light of social ethics or the overall spirit of legal order (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do2477, Jan. 28, 2016). Not only does the Defendant’s act of driving in the instant case cannot be deemed the only way to resolve the danger of traffic interference (the Defendant was not the party who caused the accident, but also another way to resolve traffic interference, such as requesting a third party to drive a vehicle) but also does not seem to conform with social ethics or legal order.

This part of the defendant and defense counsel.